Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gbm5v Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-27T09:25:34.032Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Relational Objects: Connecting People and Things Through Pasifika Styles

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  26 June 2008

Anita Herle
Affiliation:
Museum of Archaeology and Anthropology, University of Cambridge. Email: ach13@cam.ac.uk

Extract

Debates around cultural properties tend to focus on law and ethics, on appropriation and ownership, with media representations often producing stereotypes that reinforce and polarize the terms of the debate. The common, typically polemical, notion is that rapacious museums are merely a final resting point for captive static objects, with repatriation viewed as simply restorative compensation. A robust challenge to this view was developed in the Declaration on the Importance and Value of Universal Museums signed in 2002 by the directors of 19 leading museums in Europe and North America. The concept of the universal museum asserts that objects are cared for and held in trust for the world, overriding shifting political and ethnic boundaries and enabling the visitor to see “different parts of the world as indissolubly linked.” Although many would be in sympathy with the rhetorical position asserted, critics have argued that the declaration is a thinly veiled attempt to bolster immunity to repatriation claims. On both sides of the debate, the hegemonic position of many museums remains unsettling.

Type
Special Section: Museums and the Pacific
Copyright
Copyright © International Cultural Property Society 2008

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Bennett, Tony. The Birth of the Museum: History, Theory, Politics. London: Routledge, 1995.Google Scholar
Edwards, Elizabeth, Gosden, Chris, and Phillips, Ruth, eds. Sensible Objects: Colonialism, Museums and Material Culture. Oxford: Berg, 2006.Google Scholar
Herle, Anita. “Objects, Agency and Museums: Continuing Dialogues Between the Torres Strait and Cambridge.” In Museums and Source Communities: A Routledge Reader, edited by Peers, Laura and Brown, Alison, 194207. London: Routledge, 2003.Google Scholar
Hooper-Greenhill, Eilean. “The Museum in the Disciplinary Society.” In Museum Studies in Material Culture, edited by Pearce, Susan, 6172. London: Leicester University Press, 1989.Google Scholar
MacGregor, Neil. “The British Museum.” ICOM News, no. 1: 2004.Google Scholar
Peers, Laura, and Brown, Alison, eds. Museums and Source Communities: A Routledge Reader. London: Routledge, 2003.Google Scholar
Phillips, Ruth. Trading Identities: The Souvenir in Native North American Art from the Northeast 1700–1900. Seattle: University of Washington Press/Montreal: McGill-Queen's University Press, 1998.Google Scholar
Raymond, Rosanna. “Getting Specific: Pacific Fashion Activism in Auckland during the 1990s.” In Clothing the Pacific, edited by Colchester, Chloe. Oxford: Berg, 2003.Google Scholar
Raymond, Rosanna, and Salmond, Ami, eds. Pasifika Styles: Artists Inside the Museum. Dunedin, New Zealand: Otago University Press, 2008.Google Scholar
Robley, Horatio. Moko or Maori Tattooing. London: Chapman and Hall, 1896.Google Scholar
Thomas, Nicholas. Possessions: Indigenous Art, Colonial Culture. London: Thames and Hudson, 1999.Google Scholar
Strathern, Marilyn. Property, Substance and Effect. Anthropological Essays on Persons and Things. London: Athlone Press, 1999.Google Scholar
Stanley, Nick, ed. The Future of Indigenous Museums: Perspectives from the Southwest Pacific. Oxford and New York: Berghahn Books, 2007.Google Scholar
University of Cambridge Museum of Archaeology, andAnthropology. Pasifika Styles, 2006. http://www.pasifikastyles.org.uk (accessed February 23, 2007).Google Scholar